Abu Ghraib And Gitmo
Since the paper has been so worried about unnecessarily inflammitory actions in regard to the provoking cartoons, why print this article ? The author himself notes the following:
"Just as certainly as they will inflame the Arab and Muslim world, they will raise the question of whether it is responsible for Western news organizations to distribute them. And for bloggers to post them. And for pundits to debate them. Do they add anything new, or only open old wounds? Do they undo the work of investigation, trial and punishment that put men like Charles Graner, one of the original perpetrators, behind bars?"
It's a good question, and unfortunately the answer is, no there is nothing to be gained by showing them anymore. Just like at this point there really isn't any reason to print the Mohamed cartoons. They've had their effect, they are old news, move on. Some of us though who have been suspicious of the Post's editorial policies might say that they do have a reason for printing this article, embarass the President.
While some will say that it's the standard conservative bias against the "mainstream media", I'd say look at how the Post has handled the cartoon issue, apply that standard to Abu Ghraib and see if there is a difference. If you think the Post is being a little lax on their own, recently reinterated standards, the letter to the editor button is still in the upper left of the blog.
The second article, which I caught on Yahoo News, and then again in the Post's rendition has to do with the European Union, and United Nations deciding how we should handle the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.
A 54 page report, that the Bush administration has already rejected was released today by the UN. The author of the report says:
"Those people should be released or brought before an independent court," Manfred Nowak, the U.N. investigator for torture, told The Associated Press. "That should not be done in Guantanamo Bay, but before ordinary U.S. courts, or courts in their countries of origin or perhaps an international tribunal."
The EU is also calling for their release and the closing of the Guantanamo Camp, along with those in the middle east.
I'll reject the US Courts out of hand, as the prisoners at Gitmo and being held in Iraq and Afghanistan have no standing in US courts. They weren't captured in the US, they are enemy combatants captured on battlefields in other countries. In fact, the 11th Amendment of the constitution PROHIBITS our courts from acting in these cases:
Courts of the countries of origin are probably the best bet, though I'm quite sure many detainees would challenge that idea, saying that the new governments of Iraq and Afghanistan can't be trusted to give them a fair trial. That leaves an internation tribunal, which I believe would make Amnesty International and the Democratic Party happy, but would probably piss off most ordinary Americans.
As to the European Union's Parliment, I have an idea. Since they dislike these camps so much, I believe we should charter and Air France flight or two, and send the detainees to Europe to live. We've seen how well angry muslims have integrated into their society, so it shouldn't be a real problem for them. Unless of course they need cars to get to work.
Junkyard Blog has more up on this, including an actors reaction, like we need Hollywierd to tell us what to do.
Technorati Tags: Iraq, Gitmo and United Nations Abu Ghraib Torture